The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

DP1: have I got this right?

D

David Paul Carr

Guest
Well Helen, if you take cave etchings as a reference point, I guess those raw write and autofocus times just don't seem that long any more...

I've just come back from three weeks working in West Africa. Before leaving (as you do in the comfort of your own home) I entertained the possibility of only shooting with compact cameras. I could do a really good job of justifying this to myself but, because my GRD II was still being repaired, it didn't happen and I went with a Canon DSLR and one mid-range zoom.

If I look at what I have shot, 85% of it would have been impossible with any compact: most shots made at over 800 ISO, varying focal lengths required, far too bright to use an lcd to compose... And I don't think my GRD II would have survived the dust for more than one day...

The GRD II would have been useful for some outdoor work where I wished to be a little more discreet or at certain events where I could have put it in "snap" mode, f6.7, and shot off-camera flash with a Pocket Wizard to trigger it.

All to say that the fact that a camera can capture some great moments doesn't mean it can capture all of them consistently. No amount of artist's-statementing will conjour up a picture you couldn't take because there wasn't enough light or because you needed a faster shooting rate.

Which doesn't mean I don't like my little Ricohs or that I have given up entirely on using them exclusively for a job one of these days... Just that I would probably feel a little more confident of my results with a Canon MkIII DS most of the time. And my main reason for wanting to use the Ricohs would be that they might - because of their limitations - coax me away from stale, habitual ways of shooting and thinking about photography rather than anything to do with image quality or ease of use.
 
Last edited:

helenhill

Senior Member
DAVID PAUL CARR
Michaelangelo often used a burnt stick to make sketches (I was not referring to primitive cave paintings but some of those were quite sophisticated & considered in the realm of ART)

There are LIMITS to both worlds
(i.e. small sensor cameras,dslr,medium format/etc)
People can get skiddish with a big camera/lenses
or maybe you don't get that image with your compact
however it still gets down to the photographer/artist eye & expertise
not just the type of gear he uses (and Yes gear can expand your possibilities)
All the Best ! :) helen
 

Lili

New member
Interesting turn this thread has taken.
I submit that the tools very much influence how we see.
If one ventures out with a DSLR and zoom, of course you return with very different images than if you'd gone out with a fixed focal length lens in a compact camera.
Not better or worse; just different.
Different Palette, different brushes.
The limitations of the media and tools force a different way of seeing.
And that can be a Good Thing.
 

helenhill

Senior Member
LiLi
WELL SAID, BEAUTIFULLY PUT
Cheers ! helen

and bottom line : I was just abit disappointed with 7IAN7 'little camera .....ad nauseum remark / thats all :(
 
Last edited:
7

7ian7

Guest
Well put, David. As you may remember, I actually did go ahead and execute an entire four-day travel assignment in Paris using only the GX100. In the end I was happy with the results, but getting there was frustrating, many missed shots, many shots with dynamic range that rendered particular images unusable, etc.

The argument about making people skittish with a big camera — well I know that can be true. But I've found that a camera which focusses in one-tenth the time and gets the image the first time around can put people at ease too, or at least capture the image in less time than it takes for subjects to become uncomfortable about being photographed. And a rugged dSLR, to my mind, turns out to be an easier "carry around" simply because it doesn't require the cocoon of delicacy that these Ricohs demand (this from an artsy-fartsy delicate guy, not a bruiser press shooter punishing his cameras).

Helen, believe it or not I'm pretty "light". I don't know about cave etchings, but I've spent my life making art by hand, and making photographs using all kinds of marginal cameras and film media. My father before me did amazing work and mural-size collages using a Minox spy camera. I'm not a "resolution" guy, if that's what you're implying. I've been a very enthusiastic supporter and early-adopter of these cameras and a lot of other gear that most "pros" would deem questionable.

Ricoh and Sigma are manufacturing pro-priced small cameras, so I don't think it's a bad thing if some of us express our frustrations with these tools, in comparison to other digital cameras and also to their analog forbears, in hopes that they will eventually be improved.
 

scott kirkpatrick

Well-known member
My theory is that there are just 100 people who hang out in all the Internet forums. We don't realize it, because we post under different names.
Actually, Richard Feynman and John Wheeler, in a very early piece of work, proposed that the universe had only one electron in it. But because electrons could go both forward and backwards in time, we could see it going by many, many times. Maybe the 100 forum posters are really just one. Since they had to go backwards in time to start posting again in parallel, they perhaps are not aware of this.

The analogy continues. Certainly some forum posters appear to be going in the wrong direction, and when a poster and a backwards-going anti-poster collide, they may annihilate each other, giving off only heat or sometimes light.

sound plausible?

scott
 
D

David Paul Carr

Guest
7ian7... agreement, as usual, and the cocooning point was very well made. I'm also of the opinion that when you actually start talking and building relationships with your subjects, explaining who you are, what you are trying to do, getting involved over time, the size of your camera doesn't really matter that much anymore. As I'm not really interested in doing street pictures of people I don't know or interact with, the often vaunted "stealth" qualities don't interest me so much either...
Helen... thanks!
 
D

David Paul Carr

Guest
By the way, I would still like someone to address my original DP1 resolution question...
 

Lili

New member
7ian7... agreement, as usual, and the cocooning point was very well made. I'm also of the opinion that when you actually start talking and building relationships with your subjects, explaining who you are, what you are trying to do, getting involved over time, the size of your camera doesn't really matter that much anymore. As I'm not really interested in doing street pictures of people I don't know or interact with, the often vaunted "stealth" qualities don't interest me so much either...
Helen... thanks!
David, I use several small sensor cameras not so much because of their "Stealth" qualities but rather other properties inherent in the format.
1-The great Depth of Field even at wide apetures. It is very different from using my Hexar or even my Pentax. A new palette that I enjoy exploring
2-They tend to be far more compact and light, making it easier to have with me in my daily life, a visual notebook as it were.
3-Even my Fuji S6000fd, which is the same size as my K100D, is much lighter and, because of the small format, allows the use of a lens with tremendous zoom range and fairly fast aperture compared to an equivalent on the Pentax.
4-The fixed lens means the Fuji, at least, is far less vulnerable to Dust

True there are limitations, the Pentax, like all DSLR's focuses and shoots far faster.
And I use it when appropo.
But for the majority of my work, I am willing to work around the limitations.
Others have differing requirements.
And for them the small sensor cameras simply do not work.
One Size Never fits All
;)
 
Last edited:

DavidE

Active member
Certainly some forum posters appear to be going in the wrong direction, and when a poster and a backwards-going anti-poster collide, they may annihilate each other, giving off only heat or sometimes light.

sound plausible?
Yes, I think it's plausible. Apparently, I think anything is plausible -- even my accidentally taking a pretty good photo now and then, simply because the universe is in a cooperative mood. When I look at my good photos and bad photos, I can't come up with a more plausible explanation for the extreme difference.
 
7

7ian7

Guest
Lili, the finality of your "for them the small sensor cameras simply to do not work" line is a bit of an oversimplification of where I'm at with this.

I don't mean to draw any line in the sand by voicing ambivalent feelings, and I reserve the right for my feelings to evolve.

If I've in some way offended anyone by not being as consistent a Ricoh or small sensor cheerleader as others on the forum, I apologize. I don't mean to criticize anyone else's choices.

Frankly, I'm surprised to be such a standout in this regard.
 

Lili

New member
Lili, the finality of your "for them the small sensor cameras simply to do not work" line is a bit of an oversimplification of where I'm at with this.

I don't mean to draw any line in the sand by voicing ambivalent feelings, and I reserve the right for my feelings to evolve.

If I've in some way offended anyone by not being as consistent a Ricoh or small sensor cheerleader as others on the forum, I apologize. I don't mean to criticize anyone else's choices.

Frankly, I'm surprised to be such a standout in this regard.
Ian,
No offence taken.
Ever.
As for my statement, I was not referrring to you at all, however there ARE some for whom the small sensor draw is not what they want.
And that is just fine, if we all shot the same style it would be boring ;)
Different strokes, right?
I like my Ricoh, very much.
It is not perfect, however, and I am very aware of it.
I truly worry about retracting lenses in both durability and access for dust.
I would rather have a fixed and sealed lens barrell.
As I said before, a digital Hexar AF, in size, ruggedness, control and optical quality would simply rock.
Of course now I am converted to using the LCD primarily so this Ideal camera would not quite be the same as the Hexar.
:)
 
D

David Paul Carr

Guest
Lili, you can solve most of those problems by using the filter holder tube and a UV filter on your Ricoh...
 

Lili

New member
Lili, you can solve most of those problems by using the filter holder tube and a UV filter on your Ricoh...
Good suggestion David,
I actually use that set up while doing my driving shots. Not for dust though.
It protects extended lens from bumps :confused: and the hood keeps me from getting my left pinky finger nail into the upper left corner
I kept wondering why I had 'vignetting' in only some shots and just there till I checked carefully.
D'oh!!!
:ROTFL:
 
7

7ian7

Guest
That's how mine stays set up, too, though I'm not convinced it's all that airtight. It does look cool.

Guess what Lili, when I was going on about my conundrum the other day, a friend handed me a roll of Kodachrome 25 he's had in his freezer, and yesterday I loaded it in to my Hexar. It's the first film this camera has seen in a long, LONG time. I miss the preview, delete and frames-for-days of the modern era, but that camera is solid, silent and very fast. Now I have to ask my friend for the address of the one place left in America that processes Kodachrome.

I'll report.

Night, all.
 

Lili

New member
That's how mine stays set up, too, though I'm not convinced it's all that airtight. It does look cool.

Guess what Lili, when I was going on about my conundrum the other day, a friend handed me a roll of Kodachrome 25 he's had in his freezer, and yesterday I loaded it in to my Hexar. It's the first film this camera has seen in a long, LONG time. I miss the preview, delete and frames-for-days of the modern era, but that camera is solid, silent and very fast. Now I have to ask my friend for the address of the one place left in America that processes Kodachrome.

I'll report.

Night, all.


Oh, please scan if you can?
:)
I need to take my Hexar out again.....
 
D

David Paul Carr

Guest
Well I guess I didn't get much in the way of answers about resolution but I have found this :

http://www.rytterfalk.com/2008/03/07/dp1-raw-pack-for-download/

and I suggest that anyone interested in the DP1 downloads the raw samples and the Sigma software...

I still want to see how fast the camera focuses and writes its raw files but, as far as image quality goes, it looks to me as if we are very, very far beyond what the GRD II can produce...
 
7

7ian7

Guest
I saw that too. Not surprising, really. I'm still hearing about frustrations with write-speed.
 
Top